PDA

View Full Version : Flat Earth Societies



RBG
2003-Nov-03, 01:38 AM
Does anybody know how late in history these kinds of societies operated?

I'm under the impression that there were Flat Earth Societies in the last century. But were they serious about the earth being flat or was this more of a social past-time? And might such a society exist even today?

And how did they explain one part of the earth reporting darkness while another observing daylight at the same time? This question whether the society was serious or a joke.

RBG

ToSeek
2003-Nov-03, 01:44 AM
Does anybody know how late in history these kinds of societies operated?



1980 (http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/fe-scidi.htm)

tuffel999
2003-Nov-03, 02:34 AM
Sad end in the post script but really funny that someone believed this and still ran a society as late as the 1990's according to the article.

NASA Fan
2003-Nov-03, 03:39 AM
That article was too funny. (Except the post script). I kept waiting to find a publication date of April 1.


"As far as she knew, everybody in Australia knew it. She was rather shocked when she arrived here and found people speaking of Australia as being 'down under.' It really offended her. She would get in quite heated arguments with people who seemed to accuse her of coming from down under the world." Ultimately, Marjory Johnson swore in an affidavit that she had never hung by her feet in Australia.

I do not know about the rest of you, but I have never thought of anyone living in Australia or (anyplace else south of the Equator) as "hanging by their feet." To all the Australians on the board, is this news to you that you all know that the Earth is flat?


"There was a dispute out on the ship, but it was because Columbus was a flat-earther. The others believed the earth to be a ball, and they just knew that they were falling over the edge and couldn't get back. Columbus had to put them in irons and beat them until he convinced them they weren't going over any curve, and they could return. He finally calmed them down."

My question to that statement, if Columbus "knew" that the world was flat, what was he doing sailing West, away from Europe and the known trade routes to India. Since they did not know about the existance of America, he would have been sailing towards the "edge," also how can you fall over the edge of a ball.


"Uncle Joe (Stalin), Churchill, and Roosevelt laid the master plan to bring in the New Age under the United Nations," Johnson discloses with confidence. "The world ruling power was to be right here in this country. After the war, the world would be declared flat and Roosevelt would be elected first president of the world. When the UN Charter was drafted in San Francisco, they took the flat-earth map as their symbol."

I just do not see the world electing a world leader, and I especially do not see Stalin choosing an American as a world leader. Conserning the "flat earth map" how else does he expect them to represent the world on a flat piece of paper.



This article seemed like a big joke. The only part that seemed serious was the post-script.

nexus
2003-Nov-05, 02:14 AM
This guy had the money to buy a nice house and publish a newsletter and he sincerely believed that no-one had ventured past the South pole, but didn't go to check it out himself? Bah, are all crazies this lazy!

freddo
2003-Nov-05, 03:54 AM
I do not know about the rest of you, but I have never thought of anyone living in Australia or (anyplace else south of the Equator) as "hanging by their feet." To all the Australians on the board, is this news to you that you all know that the Earth is flat?

No it's not news to me - we've known it for some time... :roll:

Marjory Johnson would get into arguments not because people were accusing her of being from 'under the world,' but because she was too nutty to realise 'down-under' is phrase-ology, not the actual state of affairs...

Besides, in a flat Earth, who's rule dictates that it's the Southern Hemisphere which is 'down?'

Incidently, who the heck needs to sign an affidavit about hanging by one's feet? :o

R.A.F.
2003-Nov-05, 09:59 AM
Bah, are all crazies this lazy!

I imagine it "comes with the territory" so to speak. If every "crazy" were to actually investigate his or her "theory", they would soon learn how wrong they were...and they certainly DON'T want to be proven wrong.

Chemist
2003-Nov-05, 01:12 PM
I remember stumbling across this site once.

http://www.alaska.net/~clund/e_djublonskopf/Flatearthsociety.htm

I wonder if it is just a hoax or a practicle joke of some kind. The author takes the concept of "up and down" a little too literally.

Laser Jock
2003-Nov-05, 02:01 PM
I remember stumbling across this site once.

http://www.alaska.net/~clund/e_djublonskopf/Flatearthsociety.htm

I wonder if it is just a hoax or a practicle joke of some kind. The author takes the concept of "up and down" a little too literally.

I would say parady. Check out the following disclaimer in fine print at the bottom of the page:


The Flat Earth Society is not in any way responsible for the failure of the French to repel the Germans at the Maginot Line during WWII. Nor is the Flat Earth Society responsible for the recent yeti sightings outside the Vatican, or for the unfortunate enslavement of the Nabisco Inc. factory employees by a rogue hamster insurrectionist group. Furthermore, we are not responsible for the loss of one or more of the following, which may possibly occur as the result of exposing one's self to the dogmatic and dangerously subversive statements made within: life, limb, vision, Francois Mitterand, hearing, taste, smell, touch, thumb, Aunt Mildred, citizenship, spleen, bedrock, cloves, I Love Lucy reruns, toaster, pine derby racer, toy duck, antelope, horseradish, prosthetic ankle, double-cheeseburger, tin foil, limestone, watermelon-scented air freshner, sanity, paprika, German to Pig Latin dictionary, dish towel, pet Chihuahua, pogo stick, Golf Digest subscription, floor tile, upper torso or halibut.

:lol: =D> :lol: =D> :lol: =D>

captain swoop
2003-Nov-05, 04:38 PM
The Flat Earth Society is not in any way responsible for the failure of the French to repel the Germans at the Maginot Line during WWII. Nor is the Flat Earth Society responsible for the recent yeti sightings outside the Vatican, or for the unfortunate enslavement of the Nabisco Inc. factory employees by a rogue hamster insurrectionist group. Furthermore, we are not responsible for the loss of one or more of the following, which may possibly occur as the result of exposing one's self to the dogmatic and dangerously subversive statements made within: life, limb, vision, Francois Mitterand, hearing, taste, smell, touch, thumb, Aunt Mildred, citizenship, spleen, bedrock, cloves, I Love Lucy reruns, toaster, pine derby racer, toy duck, antelope, horseradish, prosthetic ankle, double-cheeseburger, tin foil, limestone, watermelon-scented air freshner, sanity, paprika, German to Pig Latin dictionary, dish towel, pet Chihuahua, pogo stick, Golf Digest subscription, floor tile, upper torso or halibut.

Isn't that just a standard disclaimer though? 8-[

Richard of Chelmsford
2003-Nov-06, 12:32 AM
I'm in a daft society myself and have been for 10 years.

The Richard the Third Society. It exists to disprove the fact that round about 1485, King Richard the Third of England was Not Guilty of murdering two princes in the Tower of London in order to gain the throne of England. :lol:

You might wonder if anyone cares, but in fact the society has a substantial membership..including a sizeable number of Yanks and Canadians.

My nephew enrolled me and I've been paying 12 ( about $20?) per year ever since. You get regular postings of two historical magazines..dry as dust..so suitable for nerdy types like some of us.

I wondered about enrolling Al Pacino after he made that film 'Looking for Richard.'

Mail me if you want details, you vindaloo scoffers and others. :)

AGN Fuel
2003-Nov-06, 01:10 AM
I'm in a daft society myself and have been for 10 years.

The Richard the Third Society. It exists to disprove the fact that round about 1485, King Richard the Third of England was Not Guilty of murdering two princes in the Tower of London in order to gain the throne of England. :lol:

You might wonder if anyone cares, but in fact the society has a substantial membership..including a sizeable number of Yanks and Canadians.

My nephew enrolled me and I've been paying 12 ( about $20?) per year ever since. You get regular postings of two historical magazines..dry as dust..so suitable for nerdy types like some of us.

I wondered about enrolling Al Pacino after he made that film 'Looking for Richard.'

Mail me if you want details, you vindaloo scoffers and others. :)

Seriously? The Plantagenets have long been a particular interest of mine (RIII in particular), but I thought I was alone in the world in that regard (except for a few dessicated souls cloistered in dank universities!). Now you tell me that there is a whole society set up?

Poor old Richard - possibly one of the most capable rulers to grace the English throne, yet to have his name become a synonym for twisted evil. So, what is the latest evidence in the 'case'?

PM me if you don't want to go too far OT.

Bill Thmpson
2003-Nov-06, 01:22 AM
And how did they explain one part of the earth reporting darkness while another observing daylight at the same time? This question whether the society was serious or a joke.

RBG

or, even better: how do they explain that you cannot see china from the top of a sky scraper

Richard of Chelmsford
2003-Nov-06, 01:54 AM
Seriously? The Plantagenets have long been a particular interest of mine (RIII in particular), but I thought I was alone in the world in that regard (except for a few dessicated souls cloistered in dank universities!). Now you tell me that there is a whole society set up?



Yes. Try www.r3/org/

I can't make that into a link for some reason, but it will connect, if you type it in. If you get any problems just tap in 'Richard the Third' into Google. Will mail you for your reaction soon and will not go OT.

Richard of Chelmsford
2003-Nov-06, 02:03 AM
Bemused by AGN Fuel's quote at the bottom of his entries. Eleven one more than ten?

Here's another.

'Better to have a full bottle in front of me than a full frontal lobotomy.'

ToSeek
2003-Nov-06, 02:29 AM
Try www.r3/org/


Make that http://www.r3.org/

captain swoop
2003-Nov-06, 08:36 AM
Blackadder was set at the time of Richards death and purported to show what 'really' happened. As I remember it was an important anniversary of his death that prompted the whole thing.

it has long been accepted that most of Richards story was a Tudor propaganda exercise. Shakespear wasn't going to write a play that showed the Tudors as the bad guys was he?

Richard of Chelmsford
2003-Nov-06, 02:06 PM
Try www.r3/org/


Make that http://www.r3.org/

Thanks To Seek.

I'm a computer newbie you see.

Donnie B.
2003-Nov-06, 02:38 PM
Bemused by AGN Fuel's quote at the bottom of his entries. Eleven one more than ten?
In case you're not aware, the quote is from the movie "This Is Spinal Tap", a fake "rockumentary" about a truly inept rock band. They think their amplifiers are louder (and thus better) because the volume controls are numbered 1-11 instead of 1-10.

Incidentally, that little knob-marking trick was (maybe still is?) really used by some amp makers...

SeanF
2003-Nov-06, 02:50 PM
The Richard the Third Society. It exists to disprove the fact that round about 1485, King Richard the Third of England was Not Guilty of murdering two princes in the Tower of London in order to gain the throne of England. :lol:

I'm confused.

"...disprove the fact that...King Richard...was Not Guilty..." So, it is a fact that he was not guilty, but you're trying to disprove this, thus you want to prove that he was guilty, even though it's a fact that he was not?

frenat
2003-Nov-06, 03:51 PM
Even weirder are those that beleive the earth is hollow.

http://www.thehollowearthinsider.com/
http://www.unmuseum.org/hollow.htm

diagram here
http://www.v-j-enterprises.com/holearth.html

map here
http://www.softcom.net/users/vtown/map.html

more links including nazi involvement
http://sphinxtemple.virtualave.net/articles/tunnels1.html
http://paranormal.about.com/library/weekly/aa090400a.htm
http://paranormal.about.com/library/weekly/aa011199.htm

This one is especially interesting
http://www.ourhollowearth.com/

Sister Ray
2003-Nov-06, 09:43 PM
waffles

Sister Ray
2003-Nov-06, 10:18 PM
I'm actually getting sick of discussing the flat earth notion. For some reason 99% of the people I encounter think everyone thought the world was flat until some date (usually 1492, of course, but some claim an earlier one). I explain that, no, the scientific community has known the world is a sphere for a very long time.

Of course, the last time I had this argument with someone they said "Some people used to believe that bricks and feathers fall at different rates." I explained to them that while they do fall at the same rate in absence of an atmosphere, the density of an object will increase its momentum. (I could be wrong on that, but I do know the atmosphere affects an object's momentum in some way. I dropped a pen and a heavy book just now, and the heavy book hit the ground first, so I'm not totally wrong.)

As to the hollow earth theory, it makes me think of a story when I was a kid. I was a geography nut for several years and read a book, amongst many others, that explained what we believe to be under the earth's crust. It fascinated me. Unfortunately, the book told me that the crust was a "thin layer" and I didn't realize that they were thinking in a greater magnitude than I was. So I got a shovel, dug down about a foot, and hit a large boulder. (I grew up in New England, so I'm actually amazed I got down a foot before I hit a large rock.) I decided I had hit the earth's rock layer and felt very pleased with myself.

AGN Fuel
2003-Nov-06, 10:58 PM
Bemused by AGN Fuel's quote at the bottom of his entries. Eleven one more than ten?
In case you're not aware, the quote is from the movie "This Is Spinal Tap", a fake "rockumentary" about a truly inept rock band. They think their amplifiers are louder (and thus better) because the volume controls are numbered 1-11 instead of 1-10.

Incidentally, that little knob-marking trick was (maybe still is?) really used by some amp makers...

I have yet to meet a single muso who hasn't seen that movie and identified with at least one scene/character/disaster.....

The Stonehenge scene alone reduces me to tears of laughter every time I see it - just the expression on David St Hubbins' face as the model comes down onto the stage........ :lol: :lol: :lol:

captain swoop
2003-Nov-07, 08:33 AM
Bemused by AGN Fuel's quote at the bottom of his entries. Eleven one more than ten?
In case you're not aware, the quote is from the movie "This Is Spinal Tap", a fake "rockumentary" about a truly inept rock band. They think their amplifiers are louder (and thus better) because the volume controls are numbered 1-11 instead of 1-10.

Incidentally, that little knob-marking trick was (maybe still is?) really used by some amp makers...

I have yet to meet a single muso who hasn't seen that movie and identified with at least one scene/character/disaster.....

The Stonehenge scene alone reduces me to tears of laughter every time I see it - just the expression on David St Hubbins' face as the model comes down onto the stage........ :lol: :lol: :lol:


Well, it was only one amplifier that went to 11. that's why it was better than every other Marshall.

Watch 'The Darkness' their video is a sort of Spinal Tap tribute.

They sound like a tribute band anyway.

Richard of Chelmsford
2003-Nov-07, 09:51 AM
The Richard the Third Society. It exists to disprove the fact that round about 1485, King Richard the Third of England was Not Guilty of murdering two princes in the Tower of London in order to gain the throne of England. :lol:

I'm confused.

"...disprove the fact that...King Richard...was Not Guilty..." So, it is a fact that he was not guilty, but you're trying to disprove this, thus you want to prove that he was guilty, even though it's a fact that he was not?

Oh. Yes, sorry. Not a bad astronomer, just bad with English!

I meant to say, of course, that His Majesty was NOT guilty of this heinous crime.

In England you'd call me a prat.

Bawheid
2003-Nov-10, 09:30 AM
Ever play Kingmaker? A board game of the Wars of the Roses, Richard the Third and Richard of Gloucester can co-exist and even be at war with one another............

Mainframes
2003-Nov-10, 12:11 PM
Of course, the last time I had this argument with someone they said "Some people used to believe that bricks and feathers fall at different rates." I explained to them that while they do fall at the same rate in absence of an atmosphere, the density of an object will increase its momentum. (I could be wrong on that, but I do know the atmosphere affects an object's momentum in some way. I dropped a pen and a heavy book just now, and the heavy book hit the ground first, so I'm not totally wrong.)


If you take two objects of the same mass but differing densities then they will fall at differing rates in an atmosphere. The more dense object will have a less surface area and therefore will not be held up by friction with air as much as the less dense object with its greater surface area. I also believe there would be a very small bouyancy effect depending on the difference between the densities (going to extremes - a 1kg helium filled balloon will not drop at all!!). Of course all these effects rely on there being an atmosphere, hope this clears things up :) .

Sister Ray
2003-Nov-10, 07:48 PM
Yes, that does make sense. I knew that it had something to do with the atmosphere, but wasn't sure exactly what.

calliarcale
2003-Nov-14, 09:22 PM
I'm actually getting sick of discussing the flat earth notion. For some reason 99% of the people I encounter think everyone thought the world was flat until some date (usually 1492, of course, but some claim an earlier one). I explain that, no, the scientific community has known the world is a sphere for a very long time.

I know what you mean. It's a major pet-peeve of mine too. Schools routinely teach kids that Columbus' main contribution to history was proving that the Earth was round, but it's completely wrong. Everybody knew the Earth was round in 1492. In fact, if they hadn' t known, nobody would have funded his mission.

The big irony is that the reason he was having so much trouble getting funding was because he thought the world was much smaller than it actually is. Monarchs and nobles, having access to very fine scholars, knew that if he tried something as hair-brained as sailing all the way from Europe to Asia by going west, he'd starve to death halfway there. Luckily for Columbus, he was saved from this fate by the previously unknown existence of the panamerican landmass. But when he landed in the West Indies, he took it as proof that his incorrect calculations of the Earth's size were actually correct. He died believing that he'd reached the East Indies.


Of course, the last time I had this argument with someone they said "Some people used to believe that bricks and feathers fall at different rates." I explained to them that while they do fall at the same rate in absence of an atmosphere, the density of an object will increase its momentum. (I could be wrong on that, but I do know the atmosphere affects an object's momentum in some way. I dropped a pen and a heavy book just now, and the heavy book hit the ground first, so I'm not totally wrong.)

It's actually a matter of wind resistence. The lighter something is, the more affect wind resistence will have on it as it falls. Shape has a lot to do with it as well; feathers are not only extremely light but also have a shape that promotes floating in air. Books don't. ;) Wind resistence will affect two identically-shaped items in exactly the same amount, but if one of the items has more kinetic energy (which, all else being equal, will be proportional to the object's mass), then it will take more wind resistence to slow its descent. So, heavier objects can fall a bit faster in an atmosphere, all else being equal, though the difference in mass would have to be pretty substantial in order for the difference to be noticable.

calliarcale
2003-Nov-14, 09:38 PM
One interesting thing I noticed in the article mentioned earlier in this thread was that the Flat Earthers say (correctly) that if the Earth was round, then you'd be able to tell because large bodies of water would curve. Then they go on to say they tested this at places like Lake Tahoe.

Lake Tahoe, of course, is too small. They need to be testing things like the Pacific Ocean. Or heck, there's a lake in my part of the world that is a perfect demonstrator of the curvature of the Earth -- Lake Superior. The far shore is beyond the Earth's limb. If you ride the gondola up Moose Mountain at Lutsen Resort, sometimes you can see big iron ore freighters out on the lake, hauling taconite. They usually appear right on the horizon from there. How much of the boat is visible is sometimes noticably different when seen from different elevations on the mountain. This is probably also noticable on Carlson Peak and other tiny little mountains up there, but Moose Mountain has a gondola to give you a quicker change in perspective.

Of course, the ancient Greeks even knew this. They watched boats disappear over the curve of the Earth many times, leading them eventually to even accurately compute the diameter of the round Earth.

Lung
2003-Nov-18, 10:42 PM
One interesting thing I noticed in the article mentioned earlier in this thread was that the Flat Earthers say (correctly) that if the Earth was round, then you'd be able to tell because large bodies of water would curve. Then they go on to say they tested this at places like Lake Tahoe.

Lake Tahoe, of course, is too small.

I can only imagine how they "tested" it :roll: More like they went to the shore, looked at the horizon, then patted each other on the back for being so clever! :lol:

What stumped me was, if the stupid ***** flew to the US to meet her fellow idiot, she could have seen the curvature of the earth herself! #-o

Of course, back in 1959, it is conceivable that she took a ship.

I have an interesting experience from flying in regards to this. Years ago i flew from Perth to Sydney in an primarily easterly course (of course, one does not fly in a course entirely one direction compass-wise, as it is a longer route, equator excepted. Note the flight paths shown on any airlines route maps!), leaving at close to sunset. I noticed with interest that instead of the darkness being in the east, it was more to the north! :o It then occurred to me that at so close to the longest day of the year in the southern hemisphere, the days are longer to the south, hence north to east was in darkness!! If ever any dumb fool needed evidence of the earth's curvature of the earth, they could see for themselves by taking the flight and simply looking out the window :roll:

Sister Ray
2003-Nov-19, 12:30 AM
I know what you mean. It's a major pet-peeve of mine too. Schools routinely teach kids that Columbus' main contribution to history was proving that the Earth was round, but it's completely wrong. Everybody knew the Earth was round in 1492. In fact, if they hadn' t known, nobody would have funded his mission.

The big irony is that the reason he was having so much trouble getting funding was because he thought the world was much smaller than it actually is. Monarchs and nobles, having access to very fine scholars, knew that if he tried something as hair-brained as sailing all the way from Europe to Asia by going west, he'd starve to death halfway there. Luckily for Columbus, he was saved from this fate by the previously unknown existence of the panamerican landmass. But when he landed in the West Indies, he took it as proof that his incorrect calculations of the Earth's size were actually correct. He died believing that he'd reached the East Indies.

[

Fortunately, I never learned this in school. (I learned Columbus came to this continent and believed he had reached the East Indies, and that he was looking for a quicker way to them, but that's it.) I did read it in a book, but when I was old enough to know it was wrong.

Not like I believed everything teachers told me. A funny memory from second grade comes to mind. I was a fanatic about the seas at the time and wanted to become a marine biologist. Eugene Clark (I think that's her name, she did very important work with sharks) was my hero. A teacher put up a display about fish in the hallway, and it said fish had ears. I had read otherwise, and confronted the teacher. (I forget which one of us was right, though. It was some kind of technicality, but I don't remember who's favor it was in.) Oddly enough, besides my evil biology teacher and one of my spanish teachers, they've all liked me, even when I did nothing but pass in the homework, read through the whole class, and get A's on all the tests.